Jump to content

Why on earth...


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Casey has no Idea what he's talking about.   Gap and Go strategies are nothing different from any other trade.  Just smaller Timeframe.  Don't waste your breath trying to convince him. He d

Currently you cannot short certain stocks because around the world the various stock markets, central banks,  government authorities and regulators banned shorting unless you actually hold the underly

Not looked into the forum for a few weeks (months?) guys. Had an interesting read in this thread now. Good to see the old lads in here @nit2wynit and of course @dmedin, the old pessimist . @Casey

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

But that's the point, I'm not actually borrowing the stock with spreadbetting, I'm literally making a bet about whether the price goes up or down. That's why there's no level 2 and you dont have to worry about getting filled etc

 

True you're not borrowing the actual stock but on a cfd account (spread bet) you are looking to borrow the contracts instead so amounts to the same thing, if no one want's to lend them to you who can't get filled.

Link to post

Sorry I might be wrong but I thought cfd and spreadbetting were two separate things? Speadbetting being simply betting on the price of something that IG pulls the direct data from. Hence the reason there's no need for level 2, you dont have to worry about ever not getting filled or sold and there's no need for stop limit orders? 

Link to post
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Sorry I might be wrong but I thought cfd and spreadbetting were two separate things? Speadbetting being simply betting on the price of something that IG pulls the direct data from. Hence the reason there's no need for level 2, you dont have to worry about ever not getting filled or sold and there's no need for stop limit orders? 

Hi, no sb and cfd are the same but for taxation category purposes, the underlying market for both is the cfd market which the IG market tracks. If it was as you say it would beg the question who were you betting against? IG? IG are adamant they don't take the other side of client's bets and if they did and the regulator was to find out IG's long spell as a leading broker could be at an end. So their position is that they match trades in house and any over flow is hedged, so shorts may well turn out to be unborrowable.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post

I just mean that you are not actually buying and selling to another physical person, you are taking a 'bet' against whether the market goes up or down. So if everyone was correct on their positions then IG would lose money because when people get it wrong they make money, when people get it right they lose, right? Taking the position much more like a traditional bookies in that sense. 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's that distinction that means it's a bit daft that you can't trade stocks because the shares are unborrowable, because IG doesn't own the shares to begin with. It tracks the market and you bet on it going up or down? 

Link to post
7 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

I just mean that you are not actually buying and selling to another physical person, you are taking a 'bet' against whether the market goes up or down. So if everyone was correct on their positions then IG would lose money because when people get it wrong they make money, when people get it right they lose, right? Taking the position much more like a traditional bookies in that sense. 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's that distinction that means it's a bit daft that you can't trade stocks because the shares are unborrowable, because IG doesn't own the shares to begin with. It tracks the market and you bet on it going up or down? 

you are confusing a broker with a bookie, a broker matches buyers to sellers, a bookie just takes the other side of your bet having given you 'odds'. 

If the broker can't find someone to swap contracts with you then they can't fill your order.

If the broker can't find someone to lend you stocks or contracts then they can't even start to look for someone to take your short order when you have nothing to sell.

IG have survived many major market upheavals precisely because they are not directly involve in taking bets. 

14 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

Also I don't suppose you know what the s&p500 is tracking after hours? Was expecting it to be closed till Monday 

Brokers use the futures market to give out of hours prices.

If you are looking for a broker that operates in a loosely regulated region and does take the other side of your bets I can recommend Plus 500 who nearly went bust just recently and had to issue urgent profits warning to their share holders due to clients 'getting it right' on recent bets during the covid and oil market upheavals. Good luck. 

 

 

Link to post

Sorry I think you're missing what I'm saying. IG isn't purchasing the actual stocks from an exchange, it's purchasing the data and then you are putting money on whether that price goes up or down. Therefore they do not need to find anyone to swap contracts with and the deals that go on with all cfd and spreadbetting accounts dont have any effect on price action as they dont effect liquidity at all.  

I'm not calling into question how IG operates, I dont have a problem with that at all, just trying to clear up the nature of spreadbetting. Although it is a little frustrating not being able to trade the main gainers of a day but I guess it is understandable from their point of view.

Link to post

That's the reason you can always get filled on a spreadbetting account, you dont need to look at the level 2 to ensure you'll get filled, market liquidity doesn't matter and there's no need for stop limit orders at all... 

Or am I completely wrong?! (It's a possibility) 

Link to post

I'm not saying IG takes a position on the other side of the trade but they only make money when customers lose money, whereas a traditional broker wants all their customers to win on all their trades because they will stick around, continue trading and they make their money off the commissions. 

Link to post
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

I suspect it's for this reason that you can never trade any of the main gainers in the US market, there's always the error "Market only available to close" 

Which is IG protecting themselves against big losses from big volatile moves. 

Can you expand on this as I'm close to opening an account with IG and wasn't aware of this.

If a bio stock is up 30% on the day and I want to either buy it on a pullback or fade what I think the top is, the chances are I'll get an error message saying "Market only available to close" ?

Does it happen with big daily gainers all/most/some of the time? If so I won't bother and will just open a small SB account to take a punt now and again. Cheers. 

Link to post
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Sorry I think you're missing what I'm saying. IG isn't purchasing the actual stocks from an exchange, it's purchasing the data and then you are putting money on whether that price goes up or down

this doesn't make sense, you are saying IG is just taking the other side of your bet (who else could you possibly mean?), i've explained twice that is not how it works, IG match buyers to sellers.

1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

That's the reason you can always get filled on a spreadbetting account, you dont need to look at the level 2 to ensure you'll get filled, market liquidity doesn't matter and there's no need for stop limit orders at all... 

Or am I completely wrong?! (It's a possibility) 

yes, you are completely wrong, IG's spread bet and cfd track the underlying cfd market, if you place the SB chart next to the CFD chart they are exactly the same, same candles same prices, they move in the same way because they are the same. 

you are saying you should always get filled with SB but then can't understand why you didn't get filled with SB, the answer is likely to be a misunderstanding as to how SB works. it works the same as cfd, you need a buyer for every seller and if you don't get filled then obviously the broker is not just stepping in and automatically taking the other side of your bet.

loads of new traders say brokers are corrupt, brokers know retail mostly lose and so they just take the other side of the bet, but if ever the trader doesn't get a fill they blame the broker and expect them to just take the other side of the bet.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
7 minutes ago, Caseynotes said:

this doesn't make sense, you are saying IG is just taking the other side of your bet (who else could you possibly mean?), i've explained twice that is not how it works, IG match buyers to sellers.

yes, you are completely wrong, IG's spread bet and cfd track the underlying cfd market, if you place the SB chart next to the CFD chart they are exactly the same, same candles same prices, they move in the same way because they are the same. 

you are saying you should always get filled with SB but then can't understand why you didn't get filled with SB, the answer is likely to be a misunderstanding as to how SB works. it works the same as cfd, you need a buyer for every seller and if you don't get filled then obviously the broker is not just stepping in and automatically taking the other side of your bet.

loads of new traders say brokers are corrupt, brokers know retail mostly lose and so they just take the other side of the bet, but if ever the trader doesn't get a fill they blame the broker and expect them to just take the other side of the bet.

 

Sorry I think it's you that doesn't understand the concept of spreadbetting. Yes I know they track the same market, same candlesticks, price action etc. The difference being that you are not being linked to an exchange and actually purchasing a share of a stock from a seller. You are taking a 'bet' against which way the market will move. (Hence 'spreadbetting') Which is why you can always get filled on an order at any price, buying or selling, because you are not actually buying or selling a physical share from one of the many exchanges. 

 

My issue is not getting filled, I've always been filled obviously for the reasons I've listed, but the issue is IG not allowing you to trade many of the indemand us stocks, just saying "market only available to close" 

Link to post
1 hour ago, HappilyNorth said:

Can you expand on this as I'm close to opening an account with IG and wasn't aware of this.

If a bio stock is up 30% on the day and I want to either buy it on a pullback or fade what I think the top is, the chances are I'll get an error message saying "Market only available to close" ?

Does it happen with big daily gainers all/most/some of the time? If so I won't bother and will just open a small SB account to take a punt now and again. Cheers. 

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
16 minutes ago, Caseynotes said:

 i've explained twice that is not how it works, IG match buyers to sellers.

 

 

This isn't true, you are not actually buying or selling the stock in a spreadbetting account. It's why the level 2 is largely irrelevant and there is no need for stop limit orders. 

Link to post
22 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

Shame. Oh well. You would have thought IG would be big enough to manage volatility... I've given up trying to work brokers out. 

I haven't looked at IB for years. Last time I did I'm pretty sure I really liked their platform but UK traders couldn't open accounts with them. I'll take a look now. Thanks for the heads up.

Link to post

Yeah, I mean I sort of get it, with the 500-1000% daily swings we've been getting recently, but it is disappointing though. I opened one just the other day, you might have to not be quite so accurate with the questionnaire but it's definitely doable  👍

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

The difference being that you are not being linked to an exchange and actually purchasing a share of a stock from a seller.

neither SB nor CFD are linked to the exchange unless you are dealing through the DMA platform and even then you are still dealing through IG.

1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

You are taking a 'bet' against which way the market will move

you are taking a bet on a move in the market, someone must cover that bet, who? it can only be either another buyer/seller or IG.

1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

You are taking a 'bet' against which way the market will move. (Hence 'spreadbetting') Which is why you can always get filled on an order at any price, buying or selling, because you are not actually buying or selling a physical share from one of the many exchanges.

you can't get filled if no one takes the other side of the bet, WHO? it can only be an other trader or IG and as I've already said it's obviously not IG or you would have got your fill automatically.

Link to post
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

sounds like you have been suckered in by that scammer ross cameron of warrior trading 🤕

Link to post
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

trading US small cap gappers as per ross cameron, here's the thread, what a ******* disaster that was.

 

Link to post
Guest MonkeyFlame

Just to add my 0.5c

when you take your position, as IG is not taking the other side, it has to place the same trade in the actual underlying market. 

so if you’re trying to short a hard to borrow small cap stock, IG would need to be able to obtain borrows of that stock for its own position. 
 

if you win, IGs position is covered by the market. If you lose, IGs position is covered by you. 
 

at least that’s how I thought it worked

Link to post

Interesting conversation about HOW IG operate. I have to agree with Larry trading here. IG always say they do not take the other side of the bet. BUT the fact is when you trade with them you are absolutely not in the real market, your money stays with 'Bank of IG' - so far as I am concerned if you lose they win and vice-versa.

As Larry said you are placing a trade or a bet against the data feed that IG supply - that's it. There is no one on 'the other side' of your trade. The only time IG put it out to the real market is if their risk model requires that, i.e. everyone is taking one side, short or long. Again as Larry states we are NOT in the 'real market' we do not provide liquidity ! WHY should IG care about matching another client to the 'other side' of your retail trade ? They KNOW all retail traders lose anyway. If I place a 'long' trade on the DAX and lose when spread-betting, where is that loss going, WHERE EXACTLY ? It goes to IG, are you (Caseynotes) saying it goes to the other IG client taking an opposing trade, i.e. someone that went 'short' ? Bearing in mind 80% of retail traders at IG lose WHERE are all those losses going ? ANSWER: TO BANK OF IG. 

CaseyNotes says ' IG matches buyers to sellers' that's a nice 'theory' ...again all the money stays with IG as we, the spread bettors, are NOT in any real market at all. You mention CFD's above and how they correlate with SB but again CFDs are not the real market they (brokers) just copy (via data-feed) the cash and futures market. As you correctly say CFDs are taxable for the rest of Europe to trade with. 

I have not got a problem - like LarryBoy - about how IG operate, but as far as I am concerned Larry is right, all the trades when SB'ing stay with IG ONLY inc. all the trades / bets placed and monies stay with them. If you loose they win. End of. You can call that 'taking the other side of your trade' ... I personally do not, as it kind of implies that they are 'cheating' their Clients which they are not. Again they do not need to: ALL retail traders lose (80 - 90%). 

 

Link to post

My interpretation (FWIW) is that a small number of winning clients get the money, and IG 'only' keeps the spreads.

But if 70 - 80% of clients are long on a market (say), and they turn out to be right (copper, recently) then I don't see how IG could stop from losing money unless it put some kind of real trade on or fund the losses from money made elsewhere (in an underlying market where most clients were wrong)

Edited by dmedin
Link to post

you could try doing a search as the question has been answered on the forum probably about half a dozen times by IG.

As pointed out before, brokers who take the other side of the bet are at risk of going bust and do so routinely. Brokers who don't take the other side tend stay in business and keep their license, so given the longevity of IG as a company the later business model is the more likely.

IG gets prices from the big players in the market and pass them on to you with a widened spread, simple really.

They have an A-book and a B-book, essentially profitable and non-profitable traders. B-book has far more traders but they use far less size, A-book has fewer traders but they use far greater size. 

The business model is to match in-house shorts and longs as much as possible which is often matching A book to B book and IG takes the spread off both parties. Any over flow is parallel hedged which means IG taking the same position in the larger market, if you win so do they so they collect and pay you, if you lose so do they so they collect off you and pay whoever provided the hedge, but don't worry IG still turn a profit as they get far tighter spreads than they pass on to you.

Good brokers, bad brokers, take you pick. Bad brokers are cheaper but eventually get flushed when their clients suddenly 'get it right' during a market upheaval, clients might get their money who knows, clients of Iron FX certainly didn't.

Good brokers are never the cheapest but the business model they use is sustainable and so they tend to last. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • General Statistics

    • Total Topics
      13,656
    • Total Posts
      68,264
    • Total Members
      57,144
    • Most Online
      5,137
      14/01/21 09:51

    Newest Member
    JamHar
    Joined 18/01/21 02:11
  • Posts

    • I'll try to be concise: Dent was in 2010 calling for the mother of all stock market crashes - so were Elliott Wave International in fact EWI have been call for a massive collapse since 1986!  Some of what he says is accurate - deflation for example - the reason QE has not caused inflation is because it was issued in a deflationary cycle The crash he talks about won't happen - I listened to dent and EWI back in 2010 and I choose to do my own research as other things i was investigating suggested the opposite to what they were both spouting Read my Time Cycles page, it explains the deflationary/inflationary cycles - proven with 220+ years of stock market history behind the reasoning The deflationary cycle he refers to ended late 2016, its now inflationary according to my calcs and research and my prediction is stock market is going upwards until the mid 2030's when it will crash and top out - yet Dent still thinks its in play Up until then we might get a 1987 style crash event but overall the corrections will be modest not massive and they will all be quickly surpassed I don't listen to anyone out there - I trade independently according to my methods so I don't need to be buying and holding and if I'm wrong so be it - it won't affect my trading as the market dictates my positions, not my expectations - since 2010 this has work exceptionally well, where if I'd of followed EWI and Dents forecasts I'd of lost everything in 2010! I've no thoughts on Gold other than it is inflationary hedge - as mentioned on another thread when the stock market is inflationary (which I think started 2017) then price correlation backwards to last time it was inflationary (1982-2000) gold was subdued    
    • Thanks @Caseynotes. Do you think the time of the daily close bears any significance. When viewing the hourly charts, the volume and movements seem to be higher in GMT "working hours" and then slow down overnight. Therefore, are other countries trading on GMT I wonder?
    • Saw a snippet on Sky news complaining that the Lateral Flow test must be faulty because it wasn't picking up as many positives as the PCR. Quite an unbelievable misinterpretation of the data on the number of false positives made by the PCR. Not surprising really as the fake positive numbers generated by the PCR are the only thing driving project fear and lockdowns. Meanwhile, in order to stem the flow of staff needing to self isolate following a PCR false positive the NHS are switching to ...  er, the lateral flow test.         Dr Clare Craig  @ClareCraigPath Deaths are not climbing commensurate with cases. Either COVID got less deadly (despite inc hospital admissions) or we have two measure a) a community positive rate off the charts with false positives b) a hospital rate (likely to inc some real COVID) which is at a steady state     .
×
×
  • Create New...